Hearing - Alteration of Glengrove Avenue West
and Installation of Speed Humps and
Reduction of Speed (North Toronto)
The Toronto Community Council recommends that:
(1)in order to reduce the number of speed humps on Glengrove Avenue West, from Yonge Street to Avenue Road,
from 12 in the original proposal to 10, the Draft By-law be amended to incorporate the locations noted in Appendix
A of the report (May 5, 1998) from the Director, Infrastructure Planning and Transportation, City Works Services,
and shown in Drawing No. 421F-5144 attached to the report (May 5, 1998) from the Director, Infrastructure
Planning and Transportation, City Works Services, dated November, 1997, and the Draft By-law, as amended, be
enacted;
(2)installation of the speed humps be accompanied by the alternative signage plan as described in the report (May
5, 1998) from the Director, Infrastructure Planning and Transportation, City Works Services;
(3)the appropriate City officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect to the
foregoing including the introduction in Council of any Bills that may be required.
The Toronto Community Council reports, for the information of Council, that pursuant to Clause 45 of Report No. 11 of
the City Services Committee of the former City of Toronto, titled, ATraffic Calming Pilot Project - Speed Humps -
Glengrove Avenue West@ which was adopted by City Council at its meeting on September 22 and 23, 1997, notice of its
hearing on May 6, 1998, with respect to the proposed enactment of the draft by-law was advertised in a daily newspaper on
April 14, April 21, April 28 and May 5, 1998, and Mr. Robert Toole, Toronto, Ontario, appeared before the Toronto
Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter.
The Toronto Community Council submits the following draft-by-law:
Bill No.
BY-LAW No.
To further amend former City of Toronto By-law No. 602-89, being "A By-law To authorize the construction, widening,
narrowing, alteration and repair of sidewalks, pavements and curbs at various locations", respecting the alteration of
Glengrove Avenue West by the installation of speed humps from Yonge Street to Avenue Road.
WHEREAS notice of a proposed By-law regarding the proposed alteration was published in a daily newspaper on , , and ,
1998 and interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard at a public meeting held on May 6, 1998 and it is
appropriate to amend the by-law to permit the alteration.
The Council of the City of Toronto HEREBY ENACTS as follows:
1.Former City of Toronto By-law No. 602-89, being "A By-law To authorize the construction, widening, narrowing,
alteration and repair of sidewalks, pavements and curbs at various locations", is amended:
(1)by inserting in Columns 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6, respectively, of Schedule "B-4" (Pavement Alteration/Repair) the
following:
(Column 1 (Column 2(Column 3(Column 4(Column 5(Column 6
Side/ Alteration/Drawing
Street)Corner)Repair)From)To)No./Date)
GlengroveAlterationYonge StreetAvenue Road421F-5082
Avenue Westconsistingdated
of theJuly, 1997
installation
of speed humps
ENACTED and PASSED this ______ day of ______________, A.D. 1998.
MEL LASTMAN,NOVINA WONG,
MayorCity Clerk
(Corporate Seal)
The Toronto Community Council also submits the following report (May 5, 1998) from the Director, Infrastructure
Planning and Transportation, City Works Services:
Purpose:
To advise that residents of Glengrove Avenue West between Yonge Street and Avenue Road have been polled, as directed
by the former Toronto City Council, and have registered their support to a proposal to install speed humps on the street.
Minor design refinements are addressed in this report. This report also provides information on the signage plan associated
with the proposal as a result of concerns expressed by the neighbourhood traffic committee.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:
The estimated cost for this proposal of $18,000 is accommodated in the Works and Emergency Services 1998 Capital
Budget.
Recommendations:
(1)That in order to reduce the number of speed humps on Glengrove Avenue West, from Yonge Street to Avenue Road,
from 12 in the original proposal to 10, the Draft By-law be amended to incorporate the locations noted in Appendix A of
this report, and shown in Drawing No. 421F-5144 attached, dated November, 1997, and the Draft By-law, as amended, be
enacted;
(2)That installation of the speed humps be temporarily postponed pending further consideration of the signage issues
with the Ward Councillors and residents; and
(3)That the appropriate City officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect to the
foregoing including the introduction in Council of any Bills that may be required.
Background:
The former Toronto City Council, at its meeting of September 22 and 23, 1997, in adopting Clause 45 in City Services
Committee Report No. 11, entitled "Glengrove Avenue West from Yonge Street to Avenue Road - Traffic Calming Pilot
Project - Speed Humps", approved the alteration of sections of the pavement of Glengrove Avenue West, subject to the
favourable results of polling of the affected residents pursuant to the City policy related to speed hump installation.
Comments:
Poll Results
The former City of Toronto's Speed Hump Policy (adopted by Council at its meeting of August 21, 1997) requires that a
poll of residents be conducted on streets being considered for speed hump installations, and that at least 60% of valid
responses to the poll endorse the speed hump proposal. A poll of residents was conducted by Works and Emergency
Services staff between February 17 and March 13, 1998. Some 60% of eligible voters returned valid responses to the poll,
and the results are as follows:
No. ofPercentage of
ResponsesValid Responses
In support of the speed hump proposal14163%
Opposed to the speed hump proposal 8437%
Design Refinements
Based on discussions with the Glengrove Traffic Committee, the number of speed humps on Glengrove Avenue West from
Yonge Street to Avenue Road which were originally proposed (12) has been reduced to 10 humps. A list of the speed hump
locations is included in Appendix A of this report. The revised proposal is also shown on the attached print of Drawing No.
421F-5144 dated November, 1997. Copies of the plan were circulated to the emergency services (fire, ambulance and
police). These minor refinements to the Glengrove Avenue West speed hump plan constitute a technical amendment to the
plan which does not alter its intent or function and accordingly, in my view, would not require the re-advertising of the
draft by-law.
Signage
While the poll was open, the Glengrove Avenue traffic committee wrote to City staff and Councillors Anne Johnston and
Michael Walker requesting that speed humps not be installed unless the accompanying signage was significantly reduced.
The existing practice is to place a yellow and black warning sign at each speed hump, on the right side of the street, to warn
road users of the presence of a hump. On a two-way street, this results in two signs per hump (one facing each direction of
travel). This plan was developed in consultation with emergency service staff, who stressed the importance of being able to
locate each hump accurately, even under fresh snow conditions. A sketch of the signage was attached to the previous
Departmental report (August 22, 1997) and included with the poll.
To put the City=s current signage requirements in context, the signs are an integral element of the programme at this time
and have a direct bearing on the City=s legal liability position. The special enabling Provincial legislation that was secured
by the City, first in 1973 for a pilot project in North Toronto (Balmoral and Farnham Avenues between Yonge Street and
Avenue Road) and amended in 1992 to accommodate the speed bumps in lanes programme, explicitly prescribes that any
City by-law passed pursuant to it must indicate in all cases the signage plan. In turn, the basis for the signage plan set out in
By-law No. 554-92 (now incorporated into Chapter 400-28 of the Municipal code), Ato designate parts of certain lanes as
speed control zones, to authorize the installation of speed control devices and to provide for the marking of speed control
zones and devices by signs@, was a scheme approved by the Ministry of Transportation in deliberations preceding the
enactment of the special legislation. Although this is primarily related to the signing of speed bumps in public laneways, the
rationale is also applicable, if not more so, to speed humps on City streets because of the greater traffic volumes and higher
speeds compared to laneways.
Staff nevertheless recognize that the aesthetics of the signs is a concern for some residents. As a result, the views of the
fire, police and ambulance services, and the City Solicitor, were sought about the possibility of relaxing the signage
requirement so that each block would carry a sign indicating the presence of speed humps ahead, rather than each
individual hump. For Glengrove Avenue West, this would result in 12 new signs, as opposed to the originally proposed 20
signs. I note that each hump would still have distinctive and dominant pavement markings (large white triangles) which
would be visible in all but snow conditions.
Ms. Sylvia Watson, Solicitor for Toronto Community Council, has advised in part with respect to signage required under
the special traffic calming legislation:
ASubject to any Emergency Services concerns respecting safety issues, any liability concerns would be from an engineering
design perspective, i.e. have all of the necessary analyses for good road design (of the traffic calming measures) and issues
from the public user point of view been considered (i.e. children, rollerblading, road hockey, visually impaired pedestrians,
etc.) and satisfactorily resolved (including signage).@
Ambulance Services staff have advised that they would prefer to see signs identifying every hump, but an acceptable
compromise would be to put both signs on the same pole back to back, so that although the signs would be on the wrong
side of the road for one direction of travel, there would be fewer sign poles. This, however, would not reduce the number of
signs on the street.
Since, according to the Solicitor, there does not appear to be a prescribed legal requirement to sign each speed hump
location, but rather the use of the advisory signage falls back to Asound engineering practice@, staff have undertaken a
review of recommended practice and the procedures of other jurisdictions.
There is no doubt that the City=s current speed hump signage (uneven pavement symbol on a yellow diamond-shaped
background) is consistent with provincial regulations identified in the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices
(MUTCD), and satisfies the City=s legal liability to warn motorists of a potential hazard. In addition, the Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) has published a design guide for speed humps which recommends that each installation be
signed in accordance with the local MUTCD. The Transportation Association of Canada (TAC) is developing a guide to
traffic calming. In the most recent draft (April 1998) signs are recommended at each hump, and in addition, approximately
50 metres in advance of each hump. This would actually double the number of signs currently used in Toronto applications.
Based on a review of a small sample of jurisdictions in Canada, we have encountered none thus far that do not sign each
location. A number of municipalities in the United States also seem to follow this practice for the most part, although there
does appear to be greater divergence. Montgomery County, Maryland, a community within commuting distance of
Washington DC, has nearly 1300 speed humps in place, and has speed hump signs at every hump to satisfy emergency
response and snow plowing operational concerns. One area we have come across that does not sign each location is
Portland, Oregon, with some 400 to 500 speed humps. Signs are posted at the beginning and end of each street with speed
humps. The signs may indicate that speed humps exist over the Anext 4 blocks@ or Anext 1/2 mile@, and no signs are
installed at minor intersections. Portland has very little snow, however. Austin, Texas also has a significant number of
speed humps and typically places signs only at the beginning of a series of humps, and at entrances from side streets.
Again, snow is not an issue here. No information has been received from Europe, where speed humps have been in place
for many years. In northern Europe, where snow is common, the speed hump signage requirements should be of direct
relevance to this debate.
Conclusions:
It is important to note that the City=s current signage for speed humps in roads which involves a sign at each location has
been applied at over 60 locations throughout the City and has not resulted in any complaints. The scheme is recommended
by ambulance services and is consistent with current practice in many North American jurisdictions, although there is some
divergence. In Ontario, there does not seem to be a legal requirement to sign each hump location, but sound engineering
judgment is required to minimize liability.
The City=s current practice would appear to provide the maximum degree of liability protection. This is not to say that the
alternative outlined above to reduce signage would not be acceptable, but there is a question as to whether more risk may
be assumed. Under the circumstances, I
would suggest that we continue to research northern European experience. As well, with more installations in the City, the
expectation by road users of encountering these measures will also increase. As such, it is premature for staff to recommend
relaxation of the signage requirement at this time, but perhaps in the near future, the issue can be revisited.
Contact Name and Telephone Number:
Nigel Tahair, Transportation Technologist
392-7711
Appendix A
Glengrove Avenue West from Yonge Street to Avenue Road
Proposed Speed Hump Locations
Subject: Glengrove Avenue West from Yonge Street to Avenue Road - Traffic Calming Pilot Project - Speed Humps
(Ward 15)
Origin: City Services Committee meeting of February 8, 1995 (p:\1997\ug\cws\ipt\cs970235.ipt) - ah
1.That approval be given to alter sections of the pavement on Glengrove Avenue West from Yonge Street to Avenue
Road for traffic calming purposes, as noted in Appendix A of this report, and as described below, with implementation
subject to the favourable results of polling of the affected residents pursuant to the policy related to speed hump installation
as recently adopted by City Council:
"The construction of speed humps (i.e. elongated speed bumps) on Glengrove Avenue West from Yonge Street to Avenue
Road, generally as shown on the attached print of Drawing No. 421F-5082, dated July 1997";
2.That the speed limit be reduced from forty kilometres per hour to thirty kilometres per hour on Glengrove Avenue
West from Yonge Street to Avenue Road, coincident with the implementation of traffic calming; and
3.That the appropriate City Officials be authorized to take whatever action is necessary to implement the foregoing,
including the introduction in Council of any bills that might be required to authorize the work and amend the appropriate
Schedules of Chapter 400 of the Municipal Code accordingly.
Background: City Services Committee at its February 8, 1995 meeting in considering a communication (January 11, 1995)
from Gordon J. Ewen, Director, Traffic, Lytton Park Residents Organization, requested City Works staff to assist the
residents in developing a neighbourhood traffic management plan for the area bounded by Avenue Road, Lawrence Avenue
West, Yonge Street and Roselawn Avenue (Clause 28 in City Services Committee Report No. 4). An area-wide plan was
developed but was rejected at a series of public meetings in June 1996. Since that time, a group of residents of Glengrove
Avenue West, one of the streets in the Lytton Park Area, has been working with City Works staff to develop a traffic
calming plan which has culminated in the present proposal.
Glengrove Avenue West between Yonge Street and Avenue Road is a one kilometre long, 8.5 metre wide residential
collector street with a 40 km/h speed limit. Traffic signals are located at Yonge Street, Duplex Avenue and Avenue Road,
while its intersections with Rosewell Avenue and Heather Street are under all-way stop control. Trucks are prohibited at all
times.
Parking is prohibited on the south side from Yonge Street to Duplex Avenue, and on the north side of the same block, one
hour parking is authorized between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Between Glen Castle Street and Rosewell Avenue, adjacent to
the John Ross Robertson Public School, a school pick-up/drop-off zone exists on the north side between 8:30 a.m. and 6:00
p.m. Otherwise, the three-hour parking regulation is in effect on both sides of the street.
The following data were obtained from traffic counts undertaken by City Works staff on Glengrove Avenue West in
March, 1997:
The traffic volumes recorded above were somewhat lower than other earlier counts which suggest that traffic volumes in
the 2,500 - 3,000 vehicles per day range might be more typical.
The traffic calming proposal, as illustrated on the attached print of Drawing No. 421F-5082 dated July 1997, consists of
twelve speed humps at spacings of between 45 and 90 metres. The design will employ a "sinusoidal" shape measuring 4 m
in length with a maximum height of 10 cm with the accompanying requisite signage and pavement marking plan generally
as shown on the attached sketch dated July 1997. The use of 10 cm high speed humps should result in travel speeds of
around 25 to 30 km/h and accordingly a speed limit reduction to 30 km/h, as permitted by the City of Toronto Act, 1996,
would be appropriate. No impacts on parking are anticipated, no changes to parking regulations are required, and the effects
on snow removal, street cleaning and garbage collection should be minimal.
Proponents of the plan have surveyed residents of the street and have advised that 73% of respondents would favour the
installation of speed humps on their street. Initial discussions have been undertaken with the emergency services but no
public meetings have been held. Further consultations can continue concurrently with the plan approval process, as
necessary.
As City Services Committee will recall, a comprehensive policy report on speed hump use on City streets was considered
by City Services Committee at its July 16, 1997 meeting and adopted by Council at its meeting of August 21 and 22, 1997.
It is important to note that the proposed speed hump policy recommends a formal City polling process of households
directly abutting the section of street under consideration for speed hump installations. Under this policy, at least 60% of
those responding should be in favour of the proposal to authorize implementation. Accordingly, staff will conduct a poll of
residents and report on the poll results at the deputation meeting for the project.
The changes proposed to the Glengrove Avenue West pavement as set out above constitute an alteration to a public
highway pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Act.
As City Services Committee knows, pursuant to the requirements of the Municipal Act, the intent of Council to enact a
by-law to authorize any physical changes resulting in the alteration of the pavement configuration must be advertised and
subsequently be subject to a public hearing. Given that there is not enough time left in this term of Council, it will not be
possible to complete the process this year. However, approval of this matter by Council on September 22, 1997 will enable
the statutory advertising to proceed and a hearing to be held early in the term of the new Council. In the interim,
consultations with the emergency services agencies will be undertaken to ensure that the detailed design does not unduly
hamper their respective operations.
The estimated cost of this proposal is $20,000. Funds for this purpose have been included in City Works Services 1998
Capital Budget request under bicycle lane and traffic calming initiatives and if the budget is approved and by-laws enacted
upon consideration of deputations at a public hearing as noted above, the work can be implemented in 1998.
This project is pre-approved in accordance with Schedule A of the Class Environmental Assessment for Municipal Roads
Projects.
